The race is on- in Switzerland
- Thread starter Falstaff
- Start date
Gripen
Surely the Gripen is the best choice for the Swiss?
As:
1) It is a light weight fighter to replace a lightweight fighter
2) It is the cheapest both to purchase and to operate.
3) The Swedes built it with a forward deployment, STOL, field maintenance, and operation from stretches of freeway mentality that would seem to match with the Swiss.
4) It has more than adequate A2A capability, and it is likely to get better on this front with AESA and Meteor.
Hawk 200
In fact, if your requirement is for a “light weight air policing air defence” aircraft, why not go for a variant of the Hawk? Especially as the Swiss already have Hawks as trainers. A Hawk 200 could shadow a hijacked airliner or warn off a Cessna!
Swiss Infrastructure
The Swiss wouldn’t need a fast jet combat aircraft with A2G capability to help them close their tunnels or mountain passes. Their tunnels and freeway bridges all used to be specifically designed to be wired for demolition, and still could be at short notice. In fact many of the freeway tunnels also have blast proof and NBC proof doors at each end. For use as aircraft or civil defence shelters. You can see the blast proof doors as you drive along, if you slow down from the traditional 160 or 180 km/hr! My source for this is my “cousin in law” who spent a decade as a Swiss military engineer reserve officer.
Surely the Gripen is the best choice for the Swiss?
As:
1) It is a light weight fighter to replace a lightweight fighter
2) It is the cheapest both to purchase and to operate.
3) The Swedes built it with a forward deployment, STOL, field maintenance, and operation from stretches of freeway mentality that would seem to match with the Swiss.
4) It has more than adequate A2A capability, and it is likely to get better on this front with AESA and Meteor.
Hawk 200
In fact, if your requirement is for a “light weight air policing air defence” aircraft, why not go for a variant of the Hawk? Especially as the Swiss already have Hawks as trainers. A Hawk 200 could shadow a hijacked airliner or warn off a Cessna!
Swiss Infrastructure
The Swiss wouldn’t need a fast jet combat aircraft with A2G capability to help them close their tunnels or mountain passes. Their tunnels and freeway bridges all used to be specifically designed to be wired for demolition, and still could be at short notice. In fact many of the freeway tunnels also have blast proof and NBC proof doors at each end. For use as aircraft or civil defence shelters. You can see the blast proof doors as you drive along, if you slow down from the traditional 160 or 180 km/hr! My source for this is my “cousin in law” who spent a decade as a Swiss military engineer reserve officer.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #64
Now there's an interesting sidenote regarding the Swiss fighter competition: This morning Ueli Maurer from the right-wing conservative SVP party was made Swiss secretary of defence. He immediately announced he would make the Swiss armed forces the best in the world (from Spiegel online, I bet there's a bunch of english sources as well). I wonder if and how that's going to influence the decision to be taken?
On the other side, the opposition is sharpening their knives too by preparing a public vote against a fighter buy. No matter what the decision by the Swiss government will be, the Swiss people will have the last word on this. And I guess their will be a lot of lobbying before the vote. The Hornet purchase was approved by the people (57%). I'd really love to hear about the public opinion in Switzerland from a Swiss guy.
And there is a timetable from armasuisse:
On the other side, the opposition is sharpening their knives too by preparing a public vote against a fighter buy. No matter what the decision by the Swiss government will be, the Swiss people will have the last word on this. And I guess their will be a lot of lobbying before the vote. The Hornet purchase was approved by the people (57%). I'd really love to hear about the public opinion in Switzerland from a Swiss guy.
And there is a timetable from armasuisse:
Correct me if i´m wrong, but if i´m not mistaken, when i read about the requirments.
Teh Swiss pointed out black on white, they were mainly looking for an Air 2 Air fighter, with limited noise level. and that A2G was not that important.
however, regarding their purchase budget and military budget, Gripen has an advantage.
ps.
the Swiss did not require AESA.
You're mistaking Switzerland for Germany there.
180 km/h on a Swiss Autobahn will cost you around US$ 800-850, and your license for 3 months.
Which is interesting - as their Hornets were the only ones made with titanium tubs because they were viewed as having a heavy ATG role.
Dalregementet
New Member
I heard today that Eurofighter and Rafale are too big for the Swiss underground caverns but not Gripen
http://good-times.webshots.com/album/562341466EYsUtC
But their Hornets don't have a air to ground role apart from a little bit strafing with the gun.
Strange...
I thought the higher than normal use of titanium components in the Swiss Hornet centre barrels was mainly a measure to extend their fatigue life.
Crusader2000
Banned Member
The Hornet was strengthen so the Landbased Hornet could pull 9G's vs 7.5G's for the Naval Version. I guess flying around Mountains may have something to do with it..........
and:But their Hornets don't have a air to ground role apart from a little bit strafing with the gun.
Strange...
I always understood it to be that they were initially req'd for ATG work (anti-armour etc... ) and thus needed to be hardened up for robust GB-kinetic-ADBarra said:
They were rejected initially as potential replacements for our own Hornets prior to the centre barrel solution. IIRC the HUG assessment team spent some time in Switzerland looking at whether we should do a straight buy out rather than HUG some frames.
Abe might have more detail. Or I could ask some people when I get back from leave...
The Hornet was strengthen so the Landbased Hornet could pull 9G's vs 7.5G's for the Naval Version. I guess flying around Mountains may have something to do with it..........
That would mean that someone has changed the software as well, as the Frame Stress alert kicks in at 7-7.5g.
If not, that woman will be nagging them between 7-9g all the time...
Basically: The Swiss Luftwaffe retired the Hawker Hunter as the mainline strike aircraft in 1994; subsequently the F-5 took over the strike role in a limited form.
The F/A-18 replaced the Mirage IIIS - however, it was also already planned to take over part of the Hawker Hunter's strike role (the decision to order the aircraft was in 1988, the end of the Hawker Hunter was already decided of course); the primary purpose was still to have them serve as interceptors, like the Mirages. Originally, a second batch of F/A-18 was to be procured along with air-to-ground weapons for both F/A-18 and F-5, but both these projects were then cancelled as the Luftwaffe's budget was cut by a third.
So are the Hornets. The Swiss use conventional HAS to hangar their Hornets and would likely for the new aircraft. The Miros and F-5s are flown by conscript/reservists and use the caverns because they spend most of their time in them. The Swiss Air Force is moving to an all professional pilot force so its likely the old caverns will go the same way as the artillery forts.I heard today that Eurofighter and Rafale are too big for the Swiss underground caverns but not Gripen
http://good-times.webshots.com/album/562341466EYsUtC
Not really other than to add they also looked at low hours Canadian Hornets as a way of giving the fleet more life in the dark days of the F-35 by 2012 and no gap filling Super Hornet.
wimpymouse
Banned Member
I know from another application that titanium (bolts in this case) don't have the longevity of steel equivalents. They're lighter though, and better for protection.
I'd be interested to know what situation you're talking about as we use Titanium in subs for that very reason - they don't break as readily as steel. It must be a relevation to the old Kockums engineers as well as they use titanium fasteners extensively through their sub designs. The french, germans and americans are also extensive users of titanium in their subs.
At last count Collins had over 37 different metal types used in it's construction - incl various grades of titanium. I can think of over half a dozen aircraft and systems designed for Mach 2.8+ that also use titanium fasteners/bolts.
wimpymouse
Banned Member
If you say so then it might have some scientific credibility to it, something non of us can clame. I'm into downhill riding and people swop their bolts for titanium out of weight reason, but word among downhillers is that they don't hold up like steel bolts do. This is purely out of experiance and no scientific tests, of course. Many racers don't use them out of this reason (combined with their steep price).
Then perhaps you need to discus it in context.
Stress loadings on a sub at depth or a mach 2.8 air breathing system as compared to downhill riding.
I wonder which has greater stress loadings